The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: Is quantum mechanics an accurate representation of subatomic reality?  (Read 10613 times)

Offline mathew_orman

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 132
    • View Profile
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_tunnelling

A particle can move from one position to another without being anywhere in between by "tunneling" This phenomenon is very well established both experimentally and theoretically. Your computer and cell phone wouldn't work if it didn't happen.
False claims and non existent entity of matter...
Why, because a particle cannot be tagged and or traced...
 

Offline mathew_orman

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 132
    • View Profile
Logic takes no assumptions...
 

Offline mathew_orman

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 132
    • View Profile

Useful only in its own domain and "Logic"...

It's a pretty big domain, stretching from astronomy to particle physics. I use QM most days to optimise the imaging, treatment and protection of humans and animals, and in the development of all sorts of electronic gadgets. It's also pretty handy for satellite and inertial navigation, although the plane flies well enough on newtonian mechanics.

Quote
Why study theories which reject logical reasoning and continuity of motion?
 

Because they explain what we see and predict the next observation.
You can claim anything but in reality there is no a single real example of use...
 

Offline mathew_orman

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 132
    • View Profile
Delude yourself, by all means, but humility before the facts is the essence of understanding science.

The "logic of continuity of motion" has no validity in the face of facts.  Quantum mechanics, far from failing, describes the observed discontinuities in atomic physics.
Sure, it gives a description to anything but the description is not useful...
But if you still want to argue, then please give a specific example and we will analyze it to see if it is useful or not...
 

Offline alancalverd

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4699
  • Thanked: 153 times
  • life is too short to drink instant coffee
    • View Profile
Logic takes no assumptions...

No, it always begins with the axiom that logic itself is valid, then establishes an initial premise ex nihilo from which a conclusion is to be drawn. Science begins with an observation and ends with a test of the validity of the intervening hypothesis - quite a different process.
 

Offline alancalverd

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4699
  • Thanked: 153 times
  • life is too short to drink instant coffee
    • View Profile
Delude yourself, by all means, but humility before the facts is the essence of understanding science.

The "logic of continuity of motion" has no validity in the face of facts.  Quantum mechanics, far from failing, describes the observed discontinuities in atomic physics.
Sure, it gives a description to anything but the description is not useful...
But if you still want to argue, then please give a specific example and we will analyze it to see if it is useful or not...

You might try to explain the photoelectric effect by other means, or explain why red LEDs operate at a lower voltage than blue ones, and why it took a long time to develop blue LEDs, but perhaps they haven't been invented in your century.

If you live into the late 19th century you will hear of x-rays, and possibly also of diseases of the human breast. You might then ask an old fool like me why I use molybdenum anode x-ray tubes to get a clear image of breast tumors. The answer, according to the textbook, is a consequence of quantum mechanics, not the logic of continuum mechanics - the continuum produces a lot of unhelpful soft radiation that burns the skin without forming an image. But why would you read textbooks when you can derive the characteristic spectrum by logic?

Why are sodium lamps yellow? And why is the sodium yellow spectrum itself formed of two principal lines?

Why are some people excited by the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere? Why are they wrong?

Why is mercury a liquid at room temperature?

Why is the DNA molecule a double helix?

What is the length of a second?

The boring answer that runs through all these questions is quantum mechanics, but I look forward to your continuum explanation.
 

Offline mathew_orman

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 132
    • View Profile
Need one specific example if you want to argue about QM contribution...
Also, one specific example where logic fails reality or uses false assumptions...
 

Offline chiralSPO

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1870
  • Thanked: 143 times
    • View Profile
Well, alan just listed half a dozen different examples we could discuss. I will propose a historical example that essentially started the quantum revolution. The so-called ultraviolet catastrophe. I will write a very brief summary here, but be sure to read about it here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultraviolet_catastrophe

Classical models of physics in the 19th and very early 20th centuries assumed everything was continuous. Then, because of a certain invention (now called the incandescent light bulb) people got really interested in EM radiation that was emitted from hot objects. Once they started studying this quantitatively and started proposing models they realized something was very, very wrong with the models, which predicted far more high frequency radiation than was observed, and would actually diverge to an infinite value if evaluated for the entire spectrum.

Only by constraining the allowable frequencies to a discontinuous set could the experimental data be modeled accurately. Eventually, a real physical explanation (photons) was given for this model.
 

Offline mathew_orman

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 132
    • View Profile
You need an example with detailed experiment...
Wiki quotes compare inaccurate model of radiation  which since has been refined using classical thermodynamics...
QM model was designed to agree with experimental results and not predicted them based on the same input data the Rayleigh had...
You need to look at the history of events to find out who first delivered accurate results and provided more accurate mathematical model...
 

Offline chiralSPO

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1870
  • Thanked: 143 times
    • View Profile
You need an example with detailed experiment...
Wiki quotes compare inaccurate model of radiation  which since has been refined using classical thermodynamics...
QM model was designed to agree with experimental results and not predicted them based on the same input data the Rayleigh had...
You need to look at the history of events to find out who first delivered accurate results and provided more accurate mathematical model...

I recommend downloading and looking at this powerpoint (it's 12 MB): https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&ved=0CC0QFjACahUKEwiljO3lu7DIAhVBdz4KHTKDBXg&url=http%3A%2F%2Fichf.edu.pl%2Fr_act%2Fact_pl%2Fkarpiuk1w_EN.ppt&usg=AFQjCNFjO8LmzWQnI562MbzVArC3VL0RbA&sig2=BLY4x2-OzpviiaYiMCWG9Q&cad=rja

It summarizes the experimental work relating to the ultraviolet catastrophe,  shows schematics of the experimental apparatus, and the formulas used, devised and solved by the scientists. It contains many citations of the original papers, which contain experimental descriptions and raw data (unfortunately it's in German, and it's old German at that)
 

Offline chiralSPO

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1870
  • Thanked: 143 times
    • View Profile
You need an example with detailed experiment...
Wiki quotes compare inaccurate model of radiation  which since has been refined using classical thermodynamics...
QM model was designed to agree with experimental results and not predicted them based on the same input data the Rayleigh had...
You need to look at the history of events to find out who first delivered accurate results and provided more accurate mathematical model...

For a more recent example (in English, no less!) see this book chapter: http://www.wiley-vch.de/books/sample/352730777X_c01.pdf

It addresses proton tunneling observed in the molecule tropolone (not the at all the same example in my previous post)
 

Offline alancalverd

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4699
  • Thanked: 153 times
  • life is too short to drink instant coffee
    • View Profile
Need one specific example if you want to argue about QM contribution...
choose any of those I mentioned and explain it your way. Or try to explain single-electron diffraction without using QM.

Quote
Also, one specific example where logic fails reality or uses false assumptions...

Choose any false assumption you like, e.g. that the electron is not subject to the rules of quantum mechanics, and apply logic. Lo and behold, the hydrogen atom shrinks to the size of a proton and the sun becomes a dwarf star.
 

Offline mathew_orman

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 132
    • View Profile
You need an example with detailed experiment...
Wiki quotes compare inaccurate model of radiation  which since has been refined using classical thermodynamics...
QM model was designed to agree with experimental results and not predicted them based on the same input data the Rayleigh had...
You need to look at the history of events to find out who first delivered accurate results and provided more accurate mathematical model...

For a more recent example (in English, no less!) see this book chapter: http://www.wiley-vch.de/books/sample/352730777X_c01.pdf

It addresses proton tunneling observed in the molecule tropolone (not the at all the same example in my previous post)
This is exactly the situation where one can claim anything Quantum as all the measurements are indirect and are just a pile of assumption on the top of each other...
 

Offline mathew_orman

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 132
    • View Profile
Need one specific example if you want to argue about QM contribution...
choose any of those I mentioned and explain it your way. Or try to explain single-electron diffraction without using QM.

Quote
Also, one specific example where logic fails reality or uses false assumptions...

Choose any false assumption you like, e.g. that the electron is not subject to the rules of quantum mechanics, and apply logic. Lo and behold, the hydrogen atom shrinks to the size of a proton and the sun becomes a dwarf star.
Still no specific example with experimental setup defined...
 

Offline mathew_orman

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 132
    • View Profile
You need an example with detailed experiment...
Wiki quotes compare inaccurate model of radiation  which since has been refined using classical thermodynamics...
QM model was designed to agree with experimental results and not predicted them based on the same input data the Rayleigh had...
You need to look at the history of events to find out who first delivered accurate results and provided more accurate mathematical model...

I recommend downloading and looking at this powerpoint (it's 12 MB): https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&ved=0CC0QFjACahUKEwiljO3lu7DIAhVBdz4KHTKDBXg&url=http%3A%2F%2Fichf.edu.pl%2Fr_act%2Fact_pl%2Fkarpiuk1w_EN.ppt&usg=AFQjCNFjO8LmzWQnI562MbzVArC3VL0RbA&sig2=BLY4x2-OzpviiaYiMCWG9Q&cad=rja

It summarizes the experimental work relating to the ultraviolet catastrophe,  shows schematics of the experimental apparatus, and the formulas used, devised and solved by the scientists. It contains many citations of the original papers, which contain experimental descriptions and raw data (unfortunately it's in German, and it's old German at that)
That is a sideshow of pictures and not a scientific paper... Need something like this:  https://www.google.pl/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=8&ved=0CDYQFjAHahUKEwjbjuiuqrLIAhUIAHMKHT3_CIw&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.measurement.sk%2FTemplate_2013.doc&usg=AFQjCNHs8pvaI-fWB9AOasPfux90slVizA&cad=rja
 

Offline mathew_orman

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 132
    • View Profile
Here is a plain example where QM fails to explain the phenomena:
Experiment:Silver mirror is mounted on a stage inside vacuum chamber and coherent laser beam of 650nm intersects the mirror at 45 deg.
Using QM explain why reflected beam has also 45 deg.
 

Offline chiralSPO

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1870
  • Thanked: 143 times
    • View Profile
Here is a plain example where QM fails to explain the phenomena:
Experiment:Silver mirror is mounted on a stage inside vacuum chamber and coherent laser beam of 650nm intersects the mirror at 45 deg.
Using QM explain why reflected beam has also 45 deg.

That is a question of quantum electrodynamics, which is not something I know enough about to explain.


That is a sideshow of pictures and not a scientific paper... Need something like this:  https://www.google.pl/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=8&ved=0CDYQFjAHahUKEwjbjuiuqrLIAhUIAHMKHT3_CIw&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.measurement.sk%2FTemplate_2013.doc&usg=AFQjCNHs8pvaI-fWB9AOasPfux90slVizA&cad=rja

Ok, I will upload a scientific paper on the matter (I have to do this one page at a time because of the size limit of attachments here. Here is the first installment.
 

Offline chiralSPO

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1870
  • Thanked: 143 times
    • View Profile
page 2
 

Offline chiralSPO

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1870
  • Thanked: 143 times
    • View Profile
page 3
 

Offline chiralSPO

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1870
  • Thanked: 143 times
    • View Profile
and 4
 

Offline chiralSPO

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1870
  • Thanked: 143 times
    • View Profile
5 (half way there!)
 

Offline chiralSPO

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1870
  • Thanked: 143 times
    • View Profile
6
 

Offline chiralSPO

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1870
  • Thanked: 143 times
    • View Profile
7
 

Offline chiralSPO

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1870
  • Thanked: 143 times
    • View Profile
page 8 (almost there!)
 

Offline chiralSPO

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1870
  • Thanked: 143 times
    • View Profile
and finally, page 9.

You should be able to find detailed experimental setup, raw data, analysis, interpretation and context in this article.
 

The Naked Scientists Forum


 

SMF 2.0.10 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums